Many attempts have been made to explain the cause of drug and substance abuse on the basis of information gained from sociological, criminological, and even biological theories.

In fact, the issue of drug abuse elicits so much of attention from social scientists because it wastes the young talents of a nation and no effort to combat it will be considered inappropriate. This paper tries to analyze drug and substance abuse on the basis of some important sociological theories.

Analysis

The Anomie theory

The Anomie theory as explained by Emile Durkheim is based on the assumption that lack of regulation or control of behavior in modern societies can lead to deviant or criminal behavior [Collins, 2004].

Although Durkheim came up with the term in order to explain suicides in modern societies, it is considered appropriate to explain the growing incidences of drug and substance abuse in our society on the basis of this theory.

Later experts of sociology built on the basic assumptions of Durkheim. For example, Robert Merton classified anomie into distinct levels: macroside and microside. Macroside anomie is caused when society fails to enforce clear and unambiguous limits on goals, thereby causing deviant behavior in the members of the society.

Microside anomie is caused when changes within the society imposes pressures on its members to commit crimes. It is possible to evaluate the issue of drug abuse in both these perspectives because it may be seen that drug abuse mostly happens in response to the societal pressures.

For example, social factors like busy parents, lack of mentors and role models, lack of good advice, and a highly materialistic philosophy of life that stresses on the need to gain more are some of the factors that compel underachievers and disillusioned people to seek and try drugs.

This fact may be corroborated from the observation that most of the drug addicts take to drugs at a very young age: an age when they are most susceptible to the pressures of the society.

Strengths: The theory in part, explains the reason for drug abuse in people; especially unsuccessful people who feel that they have failed in life.

Weaknesses: This theory cannot explain fully the occurrence of drug abuse and does not take many social parameters into consideration.

For example, many people who have experienced repeated failures and undue social pressures have not succumbed to drugs. On the other hand it may be seen that even very successful people fall prey to the influence of drugs.

The Differential-association Theory

Sutherland's differential association theory states that criminal behavior is a learned behavior, and that people take to crime because of their interaction with people having criminal tendencies [Author not known, 2004].

This seems to be a very valid observation considering the fact that peer pressure, and the nature of one’s circle of friends are very important aspects that increase one's susceptibility to drugs. This is perhaps the reason why criminologists emphasize on the need to have a good neighborhood for growing children so that they are not exposed to the dangers of drugs and violence.

A careful analysis of crime records will show that the neighborhood has a great influence on the mental attitude of children and young adults. The existence of gangs, and members who admire it, supports Sutherland's observations.

Drug and substance abuse happens most in these gangs and social groups where peer pressure forces many people to try drugs. It is the urge to conform to the rules of a gang that forces many young adults to succumb to anti-social activities.

Strengths: This theory is very effective in explaining why social influences are important factors that mold the character of a person. It explains the dangers of bad influences particularly at an early age.

Weaknesses: Some of the greatest achievers in the United States have come from the ghettos and similarly, some of the most vicious criminals have come from well to do families. This theory does not give importance to personal values and strengths, and completely stresses on the importance of society in molding one's character.

The Labeling Theory

Howard Becker's Labeling theory is different from other theories examined above, because it focuses more on the individual than the collective opinion or influence of the society.

According to Becker, people break rules because they see or ‘label’ themselves as being in conflict with the dominant rules, opinions, or standards of the makers of these rules.

For example, a person may take to drugs not because he enjoys taking it, but he considers using drugs as a form of rebellion against the existing norms in the society.

This kind of self-labeling, which compels a person to see himself in conflict with established norms of behavior is a major cause that prompts many to take to drugs. This kind of behavior is seen most in people who have a reason, whether valid or not, to rebel against society.

Hence, such behavior is seen most in young adults and adolescents who considers society and its moral rules as their biggest foe [Author not known 2, 2004]

Strengths: This theory gives importance to individual potential, and gives enough importance to the personal strengths of an individual.

Weakness: This theory falters because it does not consider the importance of society and other environmental factors that can modify one's behavior.

References

1. Collins, Karen Michelle, (2004), Anomie and Strain Theory, retrieved from http://www.iejs.com/Criminology/anomie_and_strain_theory.htm on October 6, 2004

2. Author not known, (2004), Sutherland's Differential Association, retrieved from http://home.comcast.net/~ddemelo/crime/differ.html on October 6, 2004

3. Author not known 2, (2004), Howard Becker’s labeling Theory, retrieved from http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/becker.htm on October 6, 2004